TexasCHLforum.com

I am simply amazed by all the respectful Americans, many of whom openly participate in the open war on Christianity in this country, including disgusting "art" exhibits, ridiculing Christians for their faith, laughing at their beliefs, insulting their intelligence, chuckling at the cartoons (on and on the list goes) and otherwise claim Christians are "forcing" their beliefs on non Christians, who are now so swift to declare the utter stupidity of those who poke fun at religious people. Why the deafening silence about the attacks on Christianity from those who now cry "foul"?

Had these "Americans" the courage of their convictions - that they hate all religion, they would be selling cartoons outside the Mosques. Instead, their courage only extends to attacking, verbally, with printed materials, and "art", Christians who they know will not attack them. Now suddenly, they claim poking fun at religions is not a good thing to do. Their courage is legendary.

I think Americans should be respectful of all religions, not just those who retaliate. I think Americans should take the First Amendment seriously. After all is said and done: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

ScooterSissy wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:Pam Geller is very easy to avoid. Don't attend her event.
The Westboro miscreants come find you and exploit your suffering when you're most vulnerable.

Huge, huge difference.
Sad that it had to be explained here.

Agreed. I think that's the first valid "there is a difference" that I've seen. Thank you.
Sorry to the other folks - the intended target of the protests does not suddenly make the tactics appropriate. That falls under "the ends justify the means".

As far as the cartoon contest being targeted at those who would promote violence, or even simply Sharia law - the problem is that may have been who it was aimed at, but there were millions of Muslim believers who also had their religion besmirched who have not done anything wrong.

Understood......... just as I understand that millions of those same peaceful Muslims hate Pam Geller for no more reason than the fact that she's a Jew, and they will always take the side of any Muslim over any Jew, no matter how repugnant the Muslim's behavior, or innocent the Jew's behavior.

Pam Geller makes no bones about it. She believes, as a Jew, that radical Islam is an existential threat to people such as herself. She says that, like it or not, she is in a war with radicalized Islam. She believes - and given the history it is hard to refute - that radical Muslims are going to try to kill her, and that moderate Muslims will be glad when they succeed. So, she is availing herself of the one thing our Constitution permits her to do: Speak Out.

I appreciate that most Muslims would view the cartoons as insulting, but if they want the insults to stop, maybe THEY should start killing off the radicals and cleaning up their own mess, so that the rest of the world doesn't have to deal with it. If they would just do that ONE thing, the rest of the world would come to accept that moderate Muslims are not a threat to them, and they would stop hating them.

Now, I am NOT suggesting that the radicals are the fault of the moderates - although, in some places they are - and I'm not suggesting that taunting your enemies is necessarily a good idea. But, until all Muslim nations declare that they recognize Israel's right to exist and stop teaching their children that Jews drink the blood of Muslim children, there will never be peace between the two, and that is not the fault of the Jews. Like Dennis Prager says, Israel has had nukes since the mid-1950s, and despite several wars with her Arab neighbors, Israel has steadfastly kept her nuclear arsenal in check. Does anybody think that once Iran succeeds in miniaturizing their nukes down to man-portable size, that they won't arm Hamas with one, and that Hamas won't use it against an Israeli target? That's not a bet for a thinking man to take. Why? Because both Hamas and the PLO have made it a matter of policy that their goal is to eradicate Israel.........NOT live alongside of........Eradicate.

As a Jew, Pam Geller feels that this disparity in hatred needs to be called out for the evil that it is. If it insults some people to see their sin called out.......well, that's too bad.....sin flees from the light. As Scripture says (John 3:20) "Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed."

As an extremely religious person myself, I question the wisdom of insulting anybody's religion. But you know what? When (so-called) "artists" created pieces like a crucifix soaking in a jar of urine, or a feces-smeared Madonna, neither I nor ANY of my brothers and sisters in Christ took a gun and tried to shoot up the gallery or assassinate the "artist". WHY did none of us do this? BECAUSE WE ARE ADULTS AND WE KNOW IT IS WRONG!!! When an allegedly Christian (I say "alleged" because the MSM reported he was Christian, and I take all they say with a hunk of rock-salt) man with a gun started assassinating abortion doctors, I and millions of my fellow believers did not cheer him on. We roundly condemned him as the murderer he was. WHY? BECAUSE ARE ADULTS AND WE KNOW IT IS WRONG!!! Just once, I'd like to see as universal a condemnation as that from the rest of moderate Islam. Instead, we get either silence (which equals assent), or we get CAIR on the networks, telling us why it was justified.

THAT is the realm of Islam alone. As a believer in a different religion, I want religion generally to have a place of respect in society - EVEN IF people belong to other religions than my own, including Islam. I want to be able to coexist with people who believe differently than I do—including those who have no religious faith at all. But until a religion recognizes that murder as retaliation against free speech is not only NOT acceptable, but that it DEMANDS CONDEMNATION, it will be the fate of a large part of the Muslim population to walk around with a chip on their shoulders.........and THAT is as insulting to non-Muslims as any cartoon image of Mohammed might be to a Muslim. The proper response should be, grow the heck up. The problem is not that I can't coexist alongside Muslims, but that many of them (not all, by any means) cannot coexist alongside me. When American Muslims react to these simple cartoons the exact same way that Christians reacted to blasphemous art involving soaking objects of Christian reverence in urine and feces, only then will they have learned to live in peace alongside the rest of us.

If we can put up with that, surely they can put up with a cartoon. If they can't, then there is something psychologically wrong with them.

Pam Geller's approach may be obnoxious, but it is startlingly effective in clarifying the differences between a large segment of Islam and the rest of the world. We may disapprove of something, but they will kill you for it.........except here in Texas, where it doesn't pay.

Amen! Chris, you make many of the points I would make.

Additionally, I would say that the radical Islam poses the same existential threat to the US and Americans as to Israel and Jews. When adherants to a religion FAIL TO GROW UP and see extreme acts of violence as acceptable within society, they pose a real and present threat to that society. When others, whether in that religion or not, fail to denounce such actions, civilization as a whole suffers. With each occurrence of such acts, humanity is reduced. The US founding principles are incompatible with a people who would allow such atrocities. Liberty -- the freedom to do as you will so long as your actions do not cause real harm to others -- is a grown-up concept, and requires tolerance, discipline and restraint. Those who choose to be intolerant and without restraint simply have no place in our society, and will be the end of it if they are not removed when appropriate.

ShootDontTalk wrote:I am simply amazed by all the respectful Americans, many of whom openly participate in the open war on Christianity in this country, including disgusting "art" exhibits, ridiculing Christians for their faith, laughing at their beliefs, insulting their intelligence, chuckling at the cartoons (on and on the list goes) and otherwise claim Christians are "forcing" their beliefs on non Christians, who are now so swift to declare the utter stupidity of those who poke fun at religious people. Why the deafening silence about the attacks on Christianity from those who now cry "foul"?

Had these "Americans" the courage of their convictions - that they hate all religion, they would be selling cartoons outside the Mosques. Instead, their courage only extends to attacking, verbally, with printed materials, and "art", Christians who they know will not attack them. Now suddenly, they claim poking fun at religions is not a good thing to do. Their courage is legendary.

I think Americans should be respectful of all religions, not just those who retaliate. I think Americans should take the First Amendment seriously. After all is said and done: I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

The left sees sees Muslims and the Muslim religion as a tool to attack America and undermine our laws and Constitution. The attacks against Christians and those with traditional values are ok with the left because those people support traditional American values that the left wants to eradicate. The left foolishly believes they can make short-term allies of radical Muslims in order to undermine the country and gain power for themselves, and then dispose of them when they are no longer useful. Where you see principle, the left sees opportunity. The left doesn't support "free speech" it seeks "left speech." Yes, there are exceptions and principled people on the left, but they don't have any power. They're marginalized on their side by those in power in the Democratic party just like libertarians and conservatives are marginalized by the fake conservatives who are in power in the Republican party.

E.Marquez wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote: The folks that staged the "cartoon contest" were deliberately poking at evil people that meet civil disagreement with terror; however, at the same time they are offending many more totally innocent people of the Muslim faith that are not terrorists.

You do realise, you, I, and the majority of the US citizens, simply drawing breath offends millions of Muslims.. YES?
You do realise, you, I, and the majority of the US citizens who do not require of and discipline our women IAW Muslim ways offends millions of Muslims..
You do realise when millions of American males refuse to kill their wife and daughters when they offend Allah by acting inappropriately IAW Muslim ways those americans are offending millions of Muslim males.

Why again am I concerned that our freedom of speech is offending millions of Muslims?
I can not control who is offended in another country in reference to how Americans live.

There is no right not to be offended. The left is working hard to construct some kind of right not to be offended.....but it is nothing more than a tool to eliminate their opposition as there is nothing anybody does that doesn't offend somebody. The essence then of "offense" is that those in power get to decide who is and who is not offended.

RoyGBiv wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:As far as the cartoon contest being targeted at those who would promote violence, or even simply Sharia law - the problem is that may have been who it was aimed at, but there were millions of Muslim believers who also had their religion besmirched who have not done anything wrong.

Sticks and stones.

Like we learned in 2nd grade.

My convictions get besmirched all the time. I manage not to kill anybody over it. Haven't even considered it.

Seriously? How many times do I have to say, my comments have nothing to do with the attempted killing over the event - merely about the event itself.

I would no more say this event was a good thing than I would the actions of the Westboro idiots. That was my point. Maybe some folks didn't catch the "100%" portions...

Personally, I though this event was a bad idea before there was an attack. Not because of the possibility of an attack, but simply because it was meant to inflame. And in that deliberate, intentional inflammation against people that deserve it, they also insulted and inflamed people that didn deserve it. Much like the Westboro folks do.

Thank you TAM, for a well thought out response (as is typical for you).

I agree with much of what you said, but do want to point out a couple of things:

On the issue of the urine encased crucifix, and feces covered madonna - I understand the parallel you are making, but don't agree that it's the same. Those were isolated instances. Granted, there are many such isolated incidents (just as there are many isolated incidents of disrespectfully portraying Mohammed). Imagine instead, an event that promised a $10,000 prize for the "best" of such "artwork". Touted along the lines of "Please, give us MORE art, similar to Piss Christ and The Holy Virgin Mary (the artwork with the Madonna and elephant dung), only BETTER.

I would be offended (no, I wouldn't attack them, but that's not the thrust of my discussion). I would also denounce them.

What originally got me thinking about all of this, especially in linking it to the Westboro inbreds, was what if this was all turned around? Originally I thought - what if Westboro showed up at a Muslim soldier's funeral, with their claim to Christianity (which you and I likely agree is false), and their "God hates f*gs" signs with representations of stick figures doing the dirty deed? I further postulated (in my mind) what if the Muslim family, offended by those "Christians", decided to hold a contest for artwork portraying Christ in homosexual acts, since that would obviously offend the "Christians" that had offended them.

That would have more closely paralleled what Pam Geller did in this case. I didn't go with that parallel, simply because it was a bit complex. Now that one of the problems with the parallel I tried to draw was pointed out, that the Westboro Inbreds go to funerals, I'm thinking my point made have been better made using that.

I don't like what Geller did. She was within her rights to do it, but that doesn't make it right. I'm against using disrespect to try to prove a point. It seldom really works.

Along those same lines, you said "As a Jew, Pam Geller feels that this disparity in hatred needs to be called out for the evil that it is. If it insults some people to see their sin called out .......well, that's too bad.....sin flees from the light." I don't see this particular event as "calling out hatred"; instead, she disrespected and insulted the religion of millions, to invite, and thus demonstrate the unreasonable hatred of a few. I don't think that was a good trade. It worked in both calling out that hatred (by a few), and even (probably unexpectedly, but thankfully) demonstrating that in some areas, like Texas, it's not a good idea to act on that hate.

I will say this, something I think we can all agree on. She picked the right state in which to do this, and apparently lucked out in getting the right security detail!

ScooterSissy wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote:As far as the cartoon contest being targeted at those who would promote violence, or even simply Sharia law - the problem is that may have been who it was aimed at, but there were millions of Muslim believers who also had their religion besmirched who have not done anything wrong.

Sticks and stones.

Like we learned in 2nd grade.

My convictions get besmirched all the time. I manage not to kill anybody over it. Haven't even considered it.

Seriously? How many times do I have to say, my comments have nothing to do with the attempted killing over the event - merely about the event itself.

I would no more say this event was a good thing than I would the actions of the Westboro idiots. That was my point. Maybe some folks didn't catch the "100%" portions...

Personally, I though this event was a bad idea before there was an attack. Not because of the possibility of an attack, but simply because it was meant to inflame. And in that deliberate, intentional inflammation against people that deserve it, they also insulted and inflamed people that didn deserve it. Much like the Westboro folks do.

I don't see it that way... I don't see the event as focusing on offending Islam... I see it as a wake up call to Americans. I see it as someone standing on a soap box shouting out for us to hold dear to our first amendment.

My right to free speech is not limited by anyone else's feelings about what I say.
There is no such thing in this country as "The Right To Never Be Offended™".
If you want that right, try to get an Amendment passed. Or, go somewhere where that right exists.

Just like anything anyone writes on the internet...
if I don't want to be offended by something.... DON'T READ IT! DON'T WATCH IT! DON'T LISTEN TO IT!

You've realized that Westboro is different, becaue they seek you out... they confront you... they take away your ability to ignore them.. right?

ScooterSissy wrote: I don't see this particular event as "calling out hatred"; instead, she disrespected and insulted the religion of millions, to invite, and thus demonstrate the unreasonable hatred of a few. I don't think that was a good trade. It worked in both calling out that hatred (by a few), and even (probably unexpectedly, but thankfully) demonstrating that in some areas, like Texas, it's not a good idea to act on that hate.

Not only do I disagree with your hypothesis that this was directed AT Muslims...... Even if that WAS her purpose, she has the right to do it.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Would I choose this method of expression..... Why does that matter one iota?
Pam Geller followed every applicable law and she has the right to say what she wants to say, regardless of whether it is offensive.

Millions have died so that we all can have that right.

RoyGBiv wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote: I don't see this particular event as "calling out hatred"; instead, she disrespected and insulted the religion of millions, to invite, and thus demonstrate the unreasonable hatred of a few. I don't think that was a good trade. It worked in both calling out that hatred (by a few), and even (probably unexpectedly, but thankfully) demonstrating that in some areas, like Texas, it's not a good idea to act on that hate.

Not only do I disagree with your hypothesis that this was directed AT Muslims...... Even if that WAS her purpose, she has the right to do it.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Would I choose this method of expression..... Why does that matter one iota?
Pam Geller followed every applicable law and she has the right to say what she wants to say, regardless of whether it is offensive.

Millions have died so that we all can have that right.

Again, no argument from me as to the right to do so; but how can anyone possibly say that a contest to portray Mohammed in cartoons was not directed at Muslims?

I have not advocated at all any sort of repression of her rights, so I don't quite understand how "millions have died so we can all have that right" is germane to my statements.

As far as what does it matter - simply a subject for discussion.

FWIW, Pam Geller came to fame because she helped to lead the protests against the construction of a mosque on the site of the WTT attack. Now THAT is obscene: Islamists take down the two largest buildings in the country, killing 2,606 people (give or take....kind of hard to tell from the obliterated remains) in cold blood, dedicating their attack to Allah; in nearby communities, Muslims dance in the streets at the news; and then local Muslim residents of NYC try to lay claim to that holy ground on which to build a mosque.......in the face of American outrage, and while accusing those outraged as intolerant and bigoted. The last time Muslims did something like that, they built a mosque on top of Temple Mount in Jerusalem. THAT is obnoxious. THAT is socially toxic. THAT is expansionist. THAT is extraordinarily disrespectful. And, THAT is intolerant, and it is intolerable. THAT is evil. THAT is exactly the kind of crap Westboro "Baptist" would pull off.

THAT evil is also one of the motivations that drives Pamela Geller's mission to call out and confront those enemies of liberty found from within the Muslim community.

Are all Muslims like that? NO. They are NOT. It would be grossly unfair to say that. Many, including those who are members of this forum, are not that kind of people. But, those good people notwithstanding, Islam as a larger institution has a HUGE image problem—a problem that began with the murder of 3,000 people on 9/11 (some of them Muslims)—and that problem is directly traceable to its loudest and most violently intolerant voices.

Here is an interesting related phenomenon......

Christians and Muslims taking up arms together to fight ISIS: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Christians+and+Mus ... fight+ISIS.

If they can do that in a war zone, why can't they do it here? If they could, Pamela Geller would probably take a chill pill, and American kafirs would see them as allies instead of the enemy. I do realize that some, but not enough, Islamic religious leaders condemn the actions of the crazies, but for whatever reason, their message isn't getting told here in the U.S. Whose fault is that? Lemme see....... could it be the national media which is controlled almost exclusively by lefties?

ScooterSissy wrote: how can anyone possibly say that a contest to portray Mohammed in cartoons was not directed at Muslims?

What I was trying (perhaps unclearly) to convey is that..... it doesn't matter what her purpose was..... she has the right to say it.... and at a venue that she paid for. People who don't like it can choose not to attend or choose to protest peacefully. Her motivations are completely irrelevant. You are welcome to think what you may about her motivations. You are free to criticize here on the internet. But none of that should ever impinge on her right to express her opinion within the constraints of the law.

You know what's really the biggest shame here.... ??
Did anyone see even a single cartoon from a single contestant anywhere in any media? Certainly not on TV. Not even on Fox.

If you still think Pam Geller was directing her event AT Muslims, you're welcome to think that. I think she was talking to you and me and all those chickens on TV that didn't show any cartoons. Not even for the news value. That made her point more clearly than anything that was said that day in Garland.

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status ... 60/photo/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Shameful.

ScooterSissy wrote: Again, no argument from me as to the right to do so; but how can anyone possibly say that a contest to portray Mohammed in cartoons was not directed at Muslims?

I have not advocated at all any sort of repression of her rights, so I don't quite understand how "millions have died so we can all have that right" is germane to my statements.

As far as what does it matter - simply a subject for discussion.

Simply as a matter for discussion, I cannot understand why you're so concerned about offending millions of Muslims when you don't utter a peep about the almost daily barrage of offenses against millions of Christians? And that list includes the genocide directed against Christian men, women, and children taking place every day in many countries. To me, the dichotomy and apathy in America is troubling.

The Annoyed Man wrote:If they can do that in a war zone, why can't they do it here? If they could, Pamela Geller would probably take a chill pill, and American kafirs would see them as allies instead of the enemy. I do realize that some, but not enough, Islamic religious leaders condemn the actions of the crazies, but for whatever reason, their message isn't getting told here in the U.S. Whose fault is that? Lemme see....... could it be the national media which is controlled almost exclusively by lefties?

You nailed it. It's part the divide and conquer tactics of the left perpetrated against Americans in order to bring that "fundamental transformation" about. It's the same method and motivation for all the media race baiting and their repeated agitation for racial division and animosity....also facilitated by The One and his Alisky acolytes as part of their Cloward-Piven strategy.

RoyGBiv wrote:

ScooterSissy wrote: how can anyone possibly say that a contest to portray Mohammed in cartoons was not directed at Muslims?

What I was trying (perhaps unclearly) to convey is that..... it doesn't matter what her purpose was..... she has the right to say it.... and at a venue that she paid for. People who don't like it can choose not to attend or choose to protest peacefully. Her motivations are completely irrelevant. You are welcome to think what you may about her motivations. You are free to criticize here on the internet. But none of that should ever impinge on her right to express her opinion within the constraints of the law.

You know what's really the biggest shame here.... ??
Did anyone see even a single cartoon from a single contestant anywhere in any media? Certainly not on TV. Not even on Fox.

Now see, on that one, I agree 100% (believe it or not). Here's where I see the difference.

The standard behavior for the news, is to report the news (or at least, it should be). I don't recall any "self-censorship" when news outlets ran photos of both "Piss Christ" and "The Holy Virgin Mary". Those photos (when they were in the news) was newsworthy. Newspapers did not publish the pictures in an effort to incite or insult anyone or any religion, but only to report what happened. They did not refrain from reporting (including photos) because someone may be offended.

However, in the case of the Garland event, they self-censored in order not to offend a religion. They modified their actions out of ... was it fear? (I suspect so).

RoyGBiv wrote:If you still think Pam Geller was directing her event AT Muslims, you're welcome to think that. I think she was talking to you and me and all those chickens on TV that didn't show any cartoons. Not even for the news value. That made her point more clearly than anything that was said that day in Garland.

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status ... 60/photo/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
[ Image ]

Shameful.

Then to add to that shame, there are news outlets that are acting as if the terrorists somehow had the right to be that offended.